Let me make myself perfectly clear...crystal that is!
Interesting that in the last few weeks I´ve had a number of calls and emails about the content on this blog. I certainly don´t feel the need to defend myself, or any of my comments in anyway and I´m not about to rescind anything I´ve said to date.
Part of our responsibilities at HR.com as a team of analysts who cover various verticals is to inform. Inform our HR community about what we hear about vendors, best practices and any other news that we feel will help HR to help grow their business.
We talk to HR people all the time (Reality HR interviews as an example) about how they do what they do or what their most pressing needs are currently. If we feel that they have something to share we ask them to participate in an interview or a case study or help us with a webcast we´re doing on a certain topic.
We also talk to vendors on a daily basis for the same reason. In many instances HR asks us what our opinions are on certain vendors and their products. While we have our own personal preferences when it comes to products we certainly don´t let that interfere with an objective overview of all of the vendors. It all boils down to what´s best for our membership.
In some instances I have recommended a less than favorite vendor of mine to someone simply because the situation called for it. Some HR people, as an example, aren´t ready to move from a paper-based system to a world-class product right away. They need some functionality and scalability to simply get them automated and on the road to best in class automation.
Other times they struggle with the idea of outsourcing. While I have talked with most RPO vendors and again, have my favorites, I don´t always recommend one company. It´s all about what´s best for the HR person and their situation.
During the course of providing all of these different deliverables to our membership there is little if any room for personal opinions. It´s going to stay that way.
However, the Blog is one area where personal opinion coupled with what we hear from the people we talk to daily becomes the basis for our content. I have talked with many of the vendors I write about as well as their employees and their clients. I have never had any reluctance to write about these conversations candidly, with an ounce of discretion of course (believe me some of what we hear we would never publicize in any way, shape or form). If I hear about financial trouble I validate my sources. If I hear sour grapes from a former employee I´ll do my best to balance that with a little digging to see if it in fact just that, sour grapes. If there appears to be something valid to investigate I´ll do my best to use the sources at my disposal to ferret out truth from what might otherwise be considered personal opinion.
The bottom line for me is if I think the information is worthy of publicizing as it may have an impact on someone´s forthcoming business decision, I´ll write about it. I´ll also add personal commentary for some perspective.
I will never write about a vendor, or anyone for that matter, with the intent to harm them or characterize them in any way but fair. Fair and educated based on the information available. I always ask for the other side so that we can provide a balance. My personal opinion has little or nothing to do with anything but the facts. There are a number of vendors with whom I´ve had less than pleasant experiences with in the past but I´ve never let that opinion cloud my judgment or taint my professional opinion in any way.
I´ve heard time and time again from many sources about how tired they are of people in our position favoring one vendor over another. That´s not something I´ve ever been accused of and have in fact have been complimented on being unbiased.
That is one thing I´m proud of and won´t change my stance on any time soon.
The mere fact that we would only provide favorable coverage to vendors who spend money with HR.com is ludicrous. In fact as I check my own activities in the last year I just realized that the vendors I´ve been most active in doing research with actually got less coverage than those I have not dealt with. If they´re reading this I can assure you it´s incidental and in no way reflects any sort of editorial policy. It´s more likely a case of trying to get the most newsworthy stuff out and editing the rest down due to time constraints.
In the end, when the news is good I will publish it. When the news is not so good I will treat it the exact same way. Our objective is to provide an objective overview and nothing we provide in the way of content is bought and paid for nor is it slanted against non-revenue contributing vendors...period!
